Infinite Crisis #7 Review
I realize that this sounds terribly, terribly patronizing, and I apologize for that, but what can I say, it is what I believe, and if my belief is patronizing...well, I'm sorry. Okay, here goes - I think that most people who think Infinite Crisis #7 was a good comic are, well, deluding themselves.
This is different from people who liked Infinite Crisis as a whole.
This is also different from people who "didn't think it was THAT bad" or anything like that.
That's fine by me.
But "it was good"?
Come on now.
This was not a good comic book. And I personally don't even really blame Geoff Johns. This read like one of the most rushed, thrown together comics I can recall reading.
So if you think it was a GOOD comic (and not "I thought this was going to suck, but it didn't" or anything like that), I can't help but question your skills of perception.
Why I don't blame Johns is because so much of Infinite Crisis, as I've written in the past, has been just achieving various purposes. Making Batman less dickish. Making the DC Universe a little brighter. Addressing some continuity things that apparently are driving, like, five people nuts. Stuff like that.
Infinite Crisis was never about telling a story, but at least in the first six issues, there was a bit of an attempt.
That attempt ceased to exist in #7. #7 was just a collection of "big" scenes. To the point where the greatest superhero/supervillain fight ever is awarded something like, five pages of story. And two of them certainly APPEAR as though they were not even inked in time, so they were just colored red. What do you folks think? Do you think DC actually did that? Just colored a bunch of a two-page spread to save some time? Or was it just a stylistic choice? And the other scenes were drawn so half-heartedly that I can easily claim that certain characters DIDN'T die, mainly because they were drawn so poorly I could argue they were some other character. In addition, how odd is the idea of having a bunch of characters show up who almost no one this side of, well, me know just for the sake of having them slaughtered?
Later on, there's a major scene with Batman and Wonder Woman. The pacing of the story totally strips the scene of any merit, and the art hurts it as well. To wit, a sound effect makes it sound like Batman tried to shoot Alex Luthor, when actually, he clearly was just cocking the gun. Later, Wonder Woman throws her sword to the ground, breaking it. The art doesn't show that, though, choosing instead to just show her dropping the sword and it breaking for some unexplained reason. Wonder Woman also completely reverses her well-though-out position on the killing issue - and we are given no explanation WHY.
That is what Infinite Crisis is about, though. It is about getting Wonder Woman to say, "Hey, killing is wrong." WHY she says it is unimportant, I guess.
Another point in this series is about how the big three are not needed, because we have so many second-tier characters. This is demonstrated in a two-page spread by Joe Bennett where he apparently was given a lunch break to pencil and ink a two-page spread with 50-odd characters on it. At least that's what the art looks like (as an aside, are these the only superheroes not slaughtered by Superboy?). However, early on in the issue, we saw that, if it weren't for the big-name heroes, the lesser-known heroes would have been slaughtered by the bad guys. So...huh?
Also, Donna Troy...what the heck? They didn't even really ATTEMPT to tie her in, did they? Man, she looks like a total moron in this series. Yes, it could be explained somewhere else, but the fact remains that it SHOULD have been explained HERE, and it wasn't. That is not good.
So, what do you call a comic that is totally rushed, to the detriment of the art, and has no coherent narrative, but rather just a collection of scenes meant to "get something" done?
I do not know.
I know what you should NOT call it, though.
And that's a good comic book.